- Joined
- May 13, 2010
- Posts
- 17,353
- Reaction score
- 1,995
- Points
- 2,155
- Location
- Slightly right of center.
- Website
- themediadesk.com
I just saw this and thought it should be posted here:
More:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sophia-yin/owner-attacked-by-dog-and_b_4293988.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false
11/18/2013
Bloody attack. A 65-year old Connecticut woman loses her entire left arm and part of her right arm after being mauled by their two-year old family dog, Tuxedo. When police arrived on Monday Nov 8 around 11:30 AM, they found Anna Murray under her car where she had hidden to fend off the dog. Deeming the dog to be an immediate threat, they shot and killed Tuxedo. The dog's brain is being tested for rabies at the state laboratory.
The dog belonged to her 26 year-old twin sons Matthew and Ian , who live with Anna. While the dog had never been reported as showing aggression to people, Animal Control had responded twice during the summer to reports by neighbors that the dog had gotten loose. Furthermore, according to CT Post reports, police had also gone to Murray's home several times to arrest her 26-year-old son, Ian. State court records show that he was found guilty of a 2005 robbery and conspiracy to commit first-degree robbery.
In cases like this, readers most likely fall at two ends of the spectrum. One side says there must have been signs and provocation of some sort and this dog could have been saved. The other side says attacks like this are out of the blue and these dogs that resemble pit bull-type breeds should be put to sleep, they are unsafe.
So who's correct? Well, like all topics of importance, there is truth on both sides.
More:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sophia-yin/owner-attacked-by-dog-and_b_4293988.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false